re: #66 Obdicut

It’s as accurate as any statement like that could be.

There is overwhelming evidence of AGW, based on solid science— including the very simply physics of CO2 action in atmosphere.

There is overwhelming evidence for Darwinian evolution— including the very precise molecular action of DNA and RNA, which wasn’t actually connected to evolution until the modern synthesis.

There is overwhelming statistical, data-driven evidence linking lung cancer and smoking, even though we lack a full understanding of how cancer operates in cells.

Nonsense. To equate your first paragraph with the later two is to debase them. AGW is simply not there yet, to say otherwise is propaganda.

That does not mean that the theory of AGW is false or that it will not eventually gain the same status as the other two, simply that it is not there yet.

The theory of Evolution and the causal link between nicotine and cancer are rock solid and unassailable at this point. AGW is about 90%.

To say otherwise in to talk in terms of advocacy, not science.